Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames
From: John Popelish (jpopelish_at_rica.net)
Date: 08/03/04
- Next message: Benno Muilwyk: "Re: c = 1."
- Previous message: bv_schornak: "Re: GOD=G_uv BAYESIAN P=99.9 %"
- In reply to: greywolf42: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Next in thread: crynwulf: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Reply: crynwulf: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 18:06:34 -0400
greywolf42 wrote:
>
> "Myxococcus xanthus" <mold-guardian@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:ce5e7813.0408030119.77bb3b25@posting.google.com...
> > The gyroscopic contribution to bicycle stability is relatively minor.
>
> As a teenager -- purely as a scientific experiment ;) -- I repeatedly
> released an old bicycle to roll down a local hill. Except for the times it
> didn't make the turn, it stayed rolling for several hundred yards. That's
> hardly minor.
Good experiment, incorrect conclusion. Try locking the steering
position to straight ahead and repeating the experiment. This does
nothing to reduce the gyroscopic effects on balance, but eliminates
any effect on steering. You might even try riding the bike and see if
you can keep it from falling over without being able to steer.
-- John Popelish
- Next message: Benno Muilwyk: "Re: c = 1."
- Previous message: bv_schornak: "Re: GOD=G_uv BAYESIAN P=99.9 %"
- In reply to: greywolf42: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Next in thread: crynwulf: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Reply: crynwulf: "Re: Gyroscopes - Usenet Physics FAQ - Reference frames"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|